Other conditions Board decisions

The Board has remanded the case due to the Veteran's request for a hearing, and further development is needed to determine if he has any residuals of an inservice right inguinal hernia surgery.

The Board denied service connection for a cardiovascular disability, finding no evidence of current disability and concluding that the Veteran's belief in having such a disability is not competent.

The Veteran's chronic inflammatory prostatitis (CIP) is granted as service connected, with the condition having its onset during his military service.

The Board denied the claim for service connection for cause of death due to colon cancer, as there was no evidence linking the condition to active duty service.

The Veteran's right hand (dominant) condition is characterized by moderate incomplete paralysis to the radial, median, and ulnar nerve resulting in limitation of motion, numbness, tingling, pain, and functional limitations. The Veteran was granted a 10 percent rating for residuals of right hand fracture and a 30 percent rating for neurologic impairment as a residual of a right hand fracture.

The Board has reopened the claim for service connection for bilateral elbow tendonitis due to new and material evidence, but the case is remanded for further examination and opinion.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to conflicting medical records and the need for further examination. The Veteran's symptoms of dizziness and vertigo are related to his military service, but a definitive diagnosis is not present.

The Board has determined that new VA examinations are necessary to assess the current severity of the Veteran's service-connected maxilla fracture and right hand fractures due to worsening symptoms reported by the Veteran.

The Board has decided to remand the issue of service connection for a skin disorder due to insufficient medical evidence in the original decision.

The Veteran's left shoulder disorder, diagnosed as bicipital tendinitis, subacromial bursitis, and AC arthrosis, is granted service connection. The Board found the evidence in equipoise as to whether his current left shoulder disability is related to military service.

The Board has decided to remand the case due to missing documents and unassociated records. The Veteran's periods of service need to be verified, as well as any existing service-connected disabilities. All necessary treatment records must be obtained and associated with the claims file.

The appeal was dismissed due to the death of the appellant, and no service connection issues were decided.

The Veteran has already been awarded eligibility for specially adapted housing assistance, and therefore is not eligible for a special home adaptation grant.

The Board found that the original grant of service connection for a bilateral eye disability arising from the Veteran's in-service eye surgery was clearly and unmistakably erroneous because his low visual acuity existed prior to service. The residuals of the PRK surgery, including bilateral dry eye syndrome, cannot be service connected.

The appeal was dismissed due to the death of the appellant, and no service connection issues were decided.

The Board denied service connection for allergic urticaria as there is no current diagnosis of the condition.

The Veteran's actinic keratosis, diagnosed as a skin disorder, was incurred during his period of active service and the Board has granted service connection for this condition.

The Veteran's service is not considered to be in a period of war, and therefore does not meet the eligibility requirements for VA non-service connected pension benefits.

The Veteran's appeal for TDIU was dismissed due to his death, as the claim has become moot.

The Board has ordered a remand for the VA to review and determine if the debt of $96,847 was validly created. The Veteran's current conservator should be given another opportunity to provide complete income and expense information which could reduce the amount of the declared debt. If any new financial documentation is received or if the April 2018 audit did not cover certain points, then a new audit must be prepared. The COWC should then address the question of timeliness again, taking into consideration the questions raised above regarding the conservator's March 2012 communication and the doctrine of equitable tolling.